Articles

About ArticlesThe below articles are published by the Administrative Law Section of the Ontario Bar Association. Members are encouraged to submit articles.  About Articles

Editor: Steven Alexander Smith

Today
Today

Edmonton East: A Statutory Right of Appeal Does Not Create a New Category of Correctness

  • January 31, 2017
  • Jon Wypych and Adam D.H. Chisholm

This is one of two companion pieces on the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in Edmonton (City) v. Edmonton East (Capilano) Shopping Centres Ltd. authored exclusively for the OBA's Administrative Law Section. This article concerns the role of statutory provisions permitting a right of appeal in determining the standard of review.

Administrative Law, Student Forum

Divisional Court Finds that Discipline Committees Cannot Suck and Blow at the Same Time When Deciding Whether to Award Costs

  • September 28, 2016
  • Christopher Wirth and Renata Antoniuk

In the recent decision of Truman v Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, 2016 ONSC 472, the Divisional Court reversed a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, which had refused to award a member costs of a stayed discipline proceeding. In so doing, the Court also confirmed that it has the jurisdiction to award costs to a member for an unwarranted Discipline Committee hearing.

Administrative Law

The International Dimension of Administrative Law: Foreign Investors Avoid Canadian Regulatory Agencies

  • March 18, 2016
  • Graham Mayeda

The environmental assessment process can be long and complicated for investors seeking approval of a proposed project. If the investment is not approved, the investor may lose a considerable amount of money. But for foreign investors, the outlook is much rosier since the decision of a NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) arbitration panel in the spring of 2015 in a case called Bilcon of Delaware et al v Government of Canada.

Administrative Law

2015 Ontario Divisional Court Case Summaries

  • November 19, 2015

2015 Ontario Division Court administrative law case summaries: Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, Ontario v. De Lottinville, Guarantee Co. of North America v. Do, Simser v. Aviva Canada Inc., Li v. Novopharm Ltd., Aiken v. Ottawa Police Services Board, Solomon v. Levy, Bart v. McMaster University...

Administrative Law

2015 Federal Court of Appeal Case Summaries

  • November 19, 2015

2015 Federal Court of Appeal administrative law case summaries: Khaper v. Air Canada, Gitxaala Nation v. R., Rahman v. Canada, Ontario Power Generation Inc. v. Greenpeace Canada, Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence), Eadie v. MTS Inc., Jia v. Canada, Canada v. Rapiscan Systems, Inc., Cole v. Canada, Agnaou c. Canada, Canadian Transit Co. v. Windsor (City), Bell Canada v. Amtelecom Limited Partnership, Asad v. Canada...

2015 SCC Administrative Law Cases

  • November 19, 2015

2015 administrative law case summaries from the Supreme Court of Canada: Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), Ontario (Energy Board) v. Ontario Power Generation Inc., Loyola High School v. Quebec (Attorney General), Zurich Insurance Co. v. Chubb Insurance Co. of Canada, Kahkewistahaw First Nation v. Taypotat, Mouvement laïque québécois v. Saguenay (City), Strickland v. Canada (Attorney General)

Administrative Law

2015 Ontario Court of Appeal Administrative Law Cases

  • November 19, 2015

2015 administrative law case summaries from the Ontario Court of Appeal: R. v Michaud, Taylor-Baptiste v OPSEU, Prince Edward County Field Naturalists v Ostrander Point GP Inc., Chaudhary v Canada (Minister of Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness)

Aboriginal Law

Evidentiary Rules and Trends in Administrative Proceedings – Implications for the Defence

  • June 29, 2015
  • Melissa J. MacKewn and Savitri Gordian

This paper explores four topics in connection with evidentiary rules that operate differently in the administrative as compared to the civil context: 1) the ability to compel testimony; 2) the limited protection against subsequent use of testimony gathered during the investigation stage at hearings; 3) the use of hearsay evidence; and 4) the expanding requirement on respondents to ‘disclose’ their defence to Staff prosecutors in advance of hearings and the resulting defence challenges.

Administrative Law